Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: PDP-11 data and function address spaces
Message-ID: <11588@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 13 Nov 89 21:05:03 GMT
References: <530@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> <225800239@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <11567@smoke.BRL.MIL> <20642@mimsy.umd.edu> <1989Nov9.200332.8763@utzoo.uucp> <5121@ncar.ucar.edu>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 15

In article <5121@ncar.ucar.edu> thor@stout.UCAR.EDU (Rich Neitzel) writes:
>Alas, you have forgotten the 11/73 and 11/83.

Also the PDP-11/55.  I think every PDP-11 model >= 44 other than 60
supported separate I&D spaces.

>... they are alive and kicking ...

The PDP-11 line was great.  The reason it is generally considered in
the past tense is that modern expectations are extremely hard to meet
with an architecture that limits a process's (I or D) address space
to "only" 64Kbytes.  Therefore people who are used to modern computer
architectures consider the PDP-11 obsolete in this very important
respect.  Undoubtedly they are still useful for many things; I wish I
had one.